Skype's for Web does not support Firefox

Firefox users who try to open the web version of Skype in the Firefox browser run into a wall currently because Microsoft claims it is not supported.

If you try to open the page in Firefox or any other non-Chromium-based non-Microsoft Edge browser, you are greeted with a "browser not supported " message.

Update: this has been going on for about 2 years apparently.

According to the message, Skype for Web supports only Microsoft Edge and Google Chrome. Microsoft asks users to either use one of these browsers -- or other Chromium-based browser without stating so explicitly -- or use the desktop program instead. A link to the desktop version of Skype is provided.

Skype for Web is available as a preview currently, and it is possible that Microsoft will unlock it for other browsers, e.g. Firefox by Mozilla, when the web service exits the preview phase. It is equally possible that Microsoft won't do so.

Microsoft does not reveal why Firefox is not supported. It is likely that Microsoft checks the user agent of the connecting browser and uses it to determine whether users get the "browser not supported" message or access to the Skype for Web preview.

Firefox users who change the browser's user agent using to that of a supported web browser, e.g. Google Chrome, won't receive the not supported message but can use the service just fine.

Note: I did not test all features and it is possible that some features may not work in Firefox due to technical limitations. It is equally possible that everything works and that Microsoft blocks Firefox for other reasons.

This is not the first time that major companies limit access to websites to certain browsers; Google has the habit of limiting new services to Chrome first before it makes them available to other browsers. Microsoft limited access to certain services in the past as well.

Closing Words

There are two main reasons why companies limit access to web services to certain browsers:

Firefox users who try to open the web version of Skype in the Firefox browser run into a wall currently because Microsoft claims it is not supported.

Author

Martin Brinkmann

Publisher

Ghacks Technology News

Logo

Advertisement

We need your help

Advertising revenue is falling fast across the Internet, and independently-run sites like Ghacks are hit hardest by it. The advertising model in its current form is coming to an end, and we have to find other ways to continue operating this site.

We are committed to keeping our content free and independent, which means no paywalls, no sponsored posts, no annoying ad formats or subscription fees.

If you like our content, and would like to help, please consider making a contribution:

About Martin Brinkmann

Martin Brinkmann is a journalist from Germany who founded Ghacks Technology News Back in 2005. He is passionate about all things tech and knows the Internet and computers like the back of his hand.You can follow Martin on Facebook, Twitter or Google+

That’s so odd… there is no lack of support in Firefox for what the service does provide, I.e. Firefox does support WebRTC etc, so the issue here are just lazy developers behind that site? Anyway, Firefox users can use mega.nz’s chat integration with audio & video calls support plus E2EE which perfectly does work cross-browser (a.k.a. The upcoming Skype Killer :))

Doing me a favor, now I can’t accidently use their pos software. Skype was cheap and worked well with my skype phone until MicroShaft bought Skype and ruined it like everything else they touch or buy. Fucking Assholes.

My first thought when I started reading this: Firefox supports WebRTC, shouldn’t changing the user agent unlock it? You proceeded to answered this.

My second thought: how likely is it is that Microsoft only wants the service to work with their current Edge browser and the browser that it will become in the future (Chromium-based). You proceeded to ask the same question.

Current version is not limited but it will be deprecated and the version described in article will be used. Skype for desktop is Electron application which is html/css/js on chromium so it is not strange that they limited preview version. However, if they continue blocking Firefox when it replaces current version, then they truly are jerks.

The current Skype for Desktop version I’m using (which updated last week) is 8.37, which is a 32-bit Windows GUI application (and is probably not an Electron app). It was built with Visual Studio 2017 v14.16. AFAIK, the “new” Skype is a UWP (Universal Windows Platform) app, which is why it was missing things like custom ringtones and ringing on speakers + headsets for a few versions.

That’s what you get when Corporations push their ideas onto the customers. Soon everyone will be pushed forcefully on the latest version of anything (with data hoarding enhanced)… Did you change the homepage from GOOGLE dot COm to ABOUT:BLANK ??? H-how dare you?

I switched to Wire, where communications are (supposedly) encrypted end to end and (supposedly) inaccessible even to the folks that *run* Wire. I’m not involved in anything shady; I’m just tired of having everything I do and say online get intercepted, analyzed, and stored for someone else’s profit or leverage. I’ve run into a few glitches, with both the Windows desktop and Android smartphone versions — and that NEVER happens with Skype, right? /s — but by and large, Wire works quite well, and I think its voice quality is actually superior to Skype’s. The biggest challenge is getting your contacts to install it. None of the people I’ve convinced to switch to Wire have regretted it. It’s *nice* to be able to talk freely, even just about mundane things, without the Vole and Big Brother listening in and recording — a feeling that is becoming increasingly elusive.

Still, even though I don’t personally care what happens to Skype anymore, I *am* interested to find out exactly why the Web-version demo doesn’t work with Firefox. May I offer a guess? The Skype team started out by coding exclusively for Google Chrome, like *every other Web app and site developer* nowadays. Then they adapted it to the current, moribund version of Edge, because as a Microsoft-owned outfit, they *had* to. And that was good enough. *Maybe*, like Netflix, they’ll try to make it *kind* of work in Firefox from time to time, but so long as it works in Google Chrome and Microsoft’s future Chrome-based browser, why bother? It’s not like any public antitrust enforcement authorities are going to come after them for conspiracy to maintain and extend a monopoly, right? And really, why would they?

Somewhat related to this: My friend was in a long-distance relationship with a girl and they used Yahoo Messenger to communicate. Well, grownups as they were, things got a bit “steamy” in a videochat between them. My friend said “there we were, having the time of our lives, when a f*****g POP-UP window appears, saying “THIS SERVICE IS NOT FOR PORNOGRAPHY” and the connection was cut!” Needless to say, they both felt damn violated and embarrassed, knowing that there’s some fat, donut-munching American watching what they do in private. I believe they switched to Skype after that, but you know..HOW do you know the same thing isn’t going on there too? If the company is American, it probably monitors you. So, as far as I know WIRE is the most secure option today. Am I 100% certain? Nope. But it’s not an American company =) ..or Russian.. Doesn’t matter if you want to show your cat to grandma or your bazooka to your babe in the Bahamas, NOBODY has the right to snoop on that.

Not sure there was a ‘fat American’ watching those video streams for two reasons: 1) These types of things are typically outsourced so it’s more likely to have been a skinny Bangladeshi or Indian… :P 2) More seriously, if the story is true then it’s far more likely to have been one of those automatic algorithms which recognises ‘skin’ or certain language patterns in the chat, like they’ve been trying to implement in Facebook.

@rswrc: Well, it *doesn’t* run in *Pale Moon*, and I must say, I am shocked. *Shocked*, I tell you! ;-) But if you enjoy watching a little ball go ’round in a circle forever, then Pale Moon is *your* platform of choice for Skype for the Web. Clearly, Pale Moon’s developers are having trouble keeping up with all of the new standards and protocols Google and its poodles have been imposing… (Pale Moon is *still* my favorite browser, so don’t jump on me, fellow PM fans. And you know what? I was able to reach Skype’s sign-in page in Basilisk, so there’s hope on the horizon.)

I appreciate the clarification. I’ve run into a bunch of sites that won’t load or run in Pale Moon but that *will* in Basilisk. I wonder how many of those incompatibilities are due to WebRTC. I can’t bring to mind *any* of them that would obviously require real-time-chat support in order to be perfectly functional.

@Peterc There’re many things that are not supported/disabled in Pale Moon like WebRTC, and DRM suppport. You can’t open site that need DRM enabled like Spotify. The dev said Basilisk is experiment browser only

There’s also no obvious need for DRM on any of the sites I’ve had trouble with, so it must be one or more of the “many other” things that are unsupported or disabled in Pale Moon. The question in my mind is whether any of those unsupported things are truly necessary or better or whether instead, they are simply locking out non-GAFAM-approved browsers that do a better job of protecting user privacy and control. [GAFAM = Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft] Some commenting systems work perfectly in Pale Moon; others don’t. Some shopping sites work perfectly in Pale Moon; others don’t. Some “customer portals” (for businesses and government agencies) work perfectly in Pale Moon; others don’t. I find that curious.

The terrible treatment of Linux users by m$ over the years and their appalling Skype version made me stop caring years ago. There are plenty of applications that do work in Firefox and Linux so Skype will never land on my pc again.

I can confirm that this doesn’t work in Opera (macOS) either, even with UA set to Chrome 72. Not sure what *Opera* could be missing in terms of support as it’s built on Chromium… This is a deliberate (or utterly lazy) strategy from Microsoft, as per usual.

Well recently someone at MS said that Mozilla should abandon Firefox and switch to being a Chromium fork, like Microsoft themselves are about to do with Edge. Maybe this is just their way of accelerating the process (of driving Firefox out of the market) along.

If the big two (Microsoft and Google) start wielding their massive market share and common Chromium base like an axe in order to push what little competition still exists out of the market, groups like the FTC should investigate and punish them accordingly.

“[G]roups like the FTC should investigate and punish [Microsoft and Google] accordingly.”

Don’t hold your breath. Public antitrust enforcement, particularly against the biggest and most powerful monopolies and oligopolies, is all but dead in the US, the result of legislative and regulatory corruption and capture and a federal judiciary dominated by the Federalist Society. Maybe the European Commission’s Directorate-General of Competition will look into it. *Maybe*.

Sort of unfortunate circumstances for Firefox these days. Will only get worse as Microsoft adopts Chromium for Edge. Really leaves Firefox going it alone and the end result given there already dwindle market share will only get less and less attention from developers.

About gHacks

Ghacks is a technology news blog that was founded in 2005 by Martin Brinkmann. It has since then become one of the most popular tech news sites on the Internet with five authors and regular contributions from freelance writers.